President Barack Obama today defended his administration’s controversial recommendation to monitor but not quarantine clinicians returning from Ebola care assignments in West Africa, saying that it is based on science.

Health Care Comments Off

The president’s remarks reinforced interim guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that rejects mandatory quarantines, but calls for restricting the movement of clinicians having had the highest risk for exposure to the Ebola virus in West Africa, which could result from a needle stick or a splash of blood in their eyes.

Such clinicians should avoid public transportation and public places, but need not confine themselves at home. In other words, jogging in the park is fine. During the 21–day incubation period of the virus, public health officials should monitor them in person, and on a daily basis, for Ebola symptoms.

Clinicians in the categories of “some risk” and “low risk” for Ebola exposure also should undergo some form of daily monitoring, according to the CDC guidance, which was aimed at state and local health departments.

Travel restrictions — but not outright quarantine — may be warranted for “some risk” clinicians on a case-by-case basis.

The CDC guidance reflects the positions of the World Health Organization, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and other healthcare groups. They assert that it is pointless to quarantine individuals while they are asymptomatic, and therefore unable to spread the virus.

Like Obama, they warn that quarantines will deter healthcare workers from volunteering for Ebola care in West Africa, which could doom efforts to stop the outbreak and allow the virus to spread to more countries.

Today the CDC recommendations picked up major endorsements from the American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, and the American Hospital Association. In a joint statement, the three groups said the CDC guidance “appropriately safeguards public health without unduly burdening those who have heroically cared for Ebola patients.”

Formula of 80 to Prevent Heart Attack upto the Age of 80

Uncategorized Comments Off

I teach my patients that 80% of heart attacks upto the age of 80 can be prevented by learning the Formula of 80 as below.

  • Keep your lower blood pressure, fasting sugar, abdominal circumference, resting heart rate and LDL cholesterol levels all below 80.
  • Walk 80 minutes each day; brisk walk 80 minutes a week with a speed of 80 steps per minute.
  • Eat less, not more than 80 gm/80 ml of caloric food in one meal.
  • Do not eat carbohydrate-based refined cereals 80 days in a year to reduce chances of heart attack.
  • Take vitamin D through sunlight 80 days in a year.
  • Do not drink alcohol and if you drink, take less than 80 ml of whiskey in a day or less than 80 gm of whiskey in a week.
  • Do not smoke or be ready for placement of stent costing Rs. 80,000/-.
  • Give 80 minutes to yourself in a day.
  • When clapping, clap 80 times.
  • If you are a heart patient, ask your doctor to give 80 mg of aspirin and 80 mg of atorvastatin.
  • Donate blood 80 times in a lifetime to reduce chances of heart attack.
  • Avoid an atmosphere of more than 80 db of noise pollution.
  • While on treadmill, try to reach 80% of your heart rate.

Legal Dangers of ‘Safe’ Social Media

Uncategorized Comments Off

Social media actions could end up causing you legal trouble.

  • HIPAA rules apply to everyone: According to lawsuits, a female patient’s ex-boyfriend convinced two UC Medical Center employees to post a screenshot of the patient’s medical records on Facebook.
  • Physicians who own a practice can be sued for the social media activities of their employees if those employees violate privacy laws.
  • Train all your staff on privacy issues.
  • Potential legal issues with online physician reviews: There are dozens of websites that offer reviews and ratings of physicians and medical facilities. Some may be specific to healthcare. Inaccurate, hurtful, and even malicious patient reviews and ratings are easy to find on the Internet. Understandably, many physicians want to “set the record straight” by posting a response to an objectionable review or rating. Sometimes you might even recognize the specific patient and be tempted to respond specifically about the circumstance. But a response might trigger liability.
  • A patient’s protected health information, like their name or photograph, linked to a review may end up with legal disputes.
  • Do not engage in social media discussions with patients. Do not attempt to specifically address patients’ complaints about you online in any sort of review site. No matter how much you want to air the real facts, regret will replace that desire in time.
  • Even if the patient review is entirely anonymous, do not enter into a debate online.

« Previous Entries